Re: INT64_MIN and _MAX - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Geoghegan
Subject Re: INT64_MIN and _MAX
Date
Msg-id CAM3SWZTBr6uzguNN7+=8ouhnv6R20Rsnt2-K=G4N-KCLX_jW1A@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: INT64_MIN and _MAX  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 2:26 AM, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
> I have been annoyed by this multiple times. I think we should make sure the C99 defines are there (providing values
ifthey aren't) and always use those. We've used them in parts of the tree long enough that it's unlikely to cause
problems.Nothing is helped by using different things in other parts of the tree. 


+1

--
Peter Geoghegan



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Greg Stark
Date:
Subject: Re: Remove fsync ON/OFF as a visible option?
Next
From: Tomas Vondra
Date:
Subject: barnacle (running CLOBBER_CACHE_RECURSIVELY) seems stuck since November